Please post the forum rules. To start with..

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:56 pm

How come no one's complained about Flip when he was doin the same thing in NHB?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:59 pm

Lothar wrote:asking for an exact definition for something you *know* is a judgement call... is lame.

This was true when we were talking about necroposting, and it's true now.

keep trying to keep your members "in check"

Heh.

It's not about keeping people in check, it's about making the board as a whole function well. If you have a serious suggestion about how to make the board function better, please, share that suggestion. If you can make a convincing argument that your suggestion will actually make this place better, please, do so. (If you convince the folks over at .com to implement your set of rules and they work well over there, that would be a pretty convincing argument.) If you just want to start a fight, or make a bull**** argument based on the fact that we can't give exact definitions for judgement calls, don't waste your time or ours.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:02 pm

JBomb asked:

Whats the formula currently being used for determining a \"pointless\" post...

The answer to the question from what Lothar wrote:

\"a judgement call\"

*JBOMB* · Post by ***JBOMB*** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:22 pm

<3

Allright..no flame intended...i think you guys shoot yourselves in the foot with over modding and by putting out a vibe of \"the ring of elders\"...

Theres always some truth in humor..MD's avatar tells a story...If my post doesnt meet the criteria the \"inner ring\" has set forth..it may get closed...

Thats a pretty heavy handed way to run a BB of what..300 active people max?..how many lans have there been?..a frillion? Everyones met everyone just about...it just seems obsurd to try and even \"control\" the board...

Everyone here i guess just has a different view of whats \"crossing the line\"...i find alot of stuff funny that under this boards rules would be deemed not appropriate...well...thats not how i and many others roll...

But guess what...we still like D3 too...Now..for me the .com solved all my \"humor in D3\" issues...But alot what i like about the descent community is deeply rooted on the .net and by its age alone is a much thicker descent resource then any new descent bb would be...you guys have been dragging the data base around for years...

So...my suggestion would be to stop people from posting vulgar inappropriate or harmful remarks and other than that just let the grass grow...Trigger happy mods have fun cause they get to play \"online community\" like its some kinda sim...But the posters think its retarded....Well, the posters not in the inner circle jerk....

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:17 pm

\"But the posters think its retarded....Well, the posters not in the inner circle jerk....\"

is that so? where are they then? why haven't they come in and said anything? unless you're speaking for a minority...

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:57 pm

no one but a small handful of us are willing to speak out, for fear of the backlash that comes from it.

y'all already seem to think i am spamming scum, so the general moderator opinion of me can't get too much lower... no matter what i do.

some people around here are already too tired of the bull★■◆●, too scared of repercussions, or just not aware that this thread exists as it is sitting down at the bottom of the board, under several stickies they have also prolly never read.

hence the heavy moderator representation.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:03 pm

JBomb, I thought I addressed the PM thing adequately... despite Goob's objection, I think most people would prefer to be addressed directly and personally rather than find themselves being criticized in public. In particular, when it's a new mod or the first time a mod has done something you disagree with, talking to them directly is a good response. \"Calling them out\" is not so good.

As for the \"big picture\", can you give me a precise definition of what you mean by \"over modded\"?

No, seriously, though, I addressed that a bit on the DBB dot com discussion thread and I think what I said there applies here: there will always be differences of opinion about what the \"ideal\" level of moderation will be. Different moderators, and different members, will have different levels of toleration for flames, pointless threads, spam, off-topic threads, necroposts, language, etc. Most of us have been on both sides of that debate at one time or another.

We're doing our best to find a happy medium of some sort here, where most people feel welcome. Others have decided to try to find a different balance point on a different board, and that's not a bad idea. I'm glad to take any suggestions you have about specific ways we can change the way we moderate, I'd just prefer them not to come in the format they came in here. It's not really fair to flip or the rest of us to put that particular thread closure on a pedastal. But if you have suggestions, or if you find a particular form of moderating works well over on the other board, please let us know. If it seems to work well there, we might pressure some of the mods here into copying it

---

As for the \"inner circle\": most of us who wield significant power here don't do so because we have access to a big red button behind the scenes. We do so because we're good at convincing people to do things differently. I went for about 2 years without admin or mod powers (the \"ghost admin\" tag was a joke about that) but most people never realized it. Some people here have the ability to close threads and such, but IMO if there's any \"inner circle\" it's the people who speak their minds and convince people -- whether or not they're mods.

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:24 pm

Lothar wrote:As for the "inner circle": most of us who wield significant power here don't do so because we have access to a big red button behind the scenes. We do so because we're good at convincing people to do things differently. I went for about 2 years without admin or mod powers (the "ghost admin" tag was a joke about that) but most people never realized it. Some people here have the ability to close threads and such, but IMO if there's any "inner circle" it's the people who speak their minds and convince people -- whether or not they're mods.

unless their words are contrary to the popular belief of those who do wield the significant power..

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:47 pm

fyre, you speak of \"backlash\" and \"repercussions\"... let me be blunt so there will be no question as to what I'm asking: what the hell are you talking about? As far as I know, we've never had any moderator be extra harsh against a particular poster because they dared challenge the mod's authority. I think if we ever heard of such a thing from a credible source that person would no longer be a mod.

There were some personal remarks made in this thread, but I don't think it's fair to call them \"backlash\" for disagreeing with the mods. Some were the result of far older conflicts, and some were the result of baiting, but there's been no backlash over anyone bringing up legitimate moderator concerns. I don't know of any backlash anywhere else, either.

You personally have taken some heat for your descriptions of moderators as \"nazis\", saying flip would \"spout off about how right he is\" (I notice you didn't answer my objections to this -- have you ever talked to him?), your statements about the \"inner circle-jerk\", comparisons to China and accusations that we're \"hiding\" things by asking for complaints to be made individually, and so on. You're not getting backlash for disagreeing with board policy, you're getting backlash for being overdramatic and insulting. In some of the dotcom stuff, some others took heat for being overdramatic and insulting, but nobody took heat for disagreeing in a civil way and there has been no backlash or repercussions against them. (If there has been, I want to hear about it.)

---

The heavy moderator representation in this thread comes mostly from the fact that very few people care enough to comment. Most of the people who care have given their general feelings long ago. If you left this in the Cafe, you'd get a lot more off-topic comments, but I doubt you'd get any more real discussion.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:02 am

fyrephlie wrote:
Lothar wrote:IMO if there's any "inner circle" it's the people who speak their minds and convince people -- whether or not they're mods.
unless their words are contrary to the popular belief of those who do wield the significant power..

I take it you're unaware of my history here.

When I was first here, my words were very much contrary to the belief of the guys who ran the place. Sup personally threatened to ban me at least 3 times.

Notice that I didn't talk about those who merely "speak their minds" -- I spoke of those who "speak their minds and convince people". That's what I did -- I had an idea for how I thought the board should be run, and I talked to the guys running the place and eventually convinced them. I had an idea about how I thought the place should be run, and I convinced the powers that be that I had a good idea. It took time and a lot of discussion, but they came around because I actually did have a good idea.

Now, if you want to know some good ways to be unconvincing, let's start here:
- call people "nazis" and make other hyperbolic comparisons rather than acknowledging the presence of a small difference of opinion
- make assumptions and accusations about how unreasonable everyone but you is
- take cheap shots at people that really have no relevance to the thread
- suggest that you're part of a majority that lives in great fear, and that you're one of the few "courageous" ones willing to stand up to fictional repercussions
- treat those you're trying to convince like they're idiots and berate them for not agreeing with you

Seriously, fyre... if you put forth a reasonable argument, you might be convincing. But the sort of comments you've put forth so far in this thread do not constitute a "reasonable argument".

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:45 am

postcount be damned, believe it or not, i don't really like spending time typing. i have other things to do... luckily, on days like today i can do it from the chair i am in. because of the fact that i don't like typing, i like to sum up my opinions quickly and consisely, and if you can really tell me, that calling a moderator a 'nazi' is something you and everyone else here can't understand... well you can't tell me that, so it doesn't matter. but it makes for 'great fluff' in your argument.

i am not assuming anything in regards to how unreasonable people around here are. as a matter of fact, a good chunk of this thread shows 'unreasonable', including people saying that they disagree with the closure of a thread, then proceeding to jump on me and my own dissent.

cheap shots?

i am not suggesting i am part of a majority... i am suggesting that i am part of a group of more than just myself, and that others here are not willing to speak up. i am saying that people with differing opinions have already left. i am saying that people who may not agree, have not even seen this thread. i am not talking about a majority, nor did i try to elude to one. i am saying that i am not the ONLY person who feels the way i do.

treat those i am trying to convince like idiots, or berate them? i didn't knwo i had 'berated' anyone. And treating people like idiots? thus far, most of the responses directed at me have been in the very nature you are describing, as if i am some ignorant little kid who has no idea about what i am talking about.

i am sorry if you don't feel i have put forth said 'reasonable arguement'. i feel that i have made some very real reasonable arguments all throughout, and that my thoughts and opinions on this matter are rather clear. instead, you insist on picking my posts apart, and sniping at what amounts to semantecs and syntax.

let's recap:

i think the 'pointless' comment and closure was rediculous

this thread was created by WarAdvocat for that exact reason

some agreement and disagreement

koolbear reopens thread, and moves this to feedback

fliptw defended his actions as just and true

i posted 'hitler image', indicating i felt his were the actions of a 'forum nazi', a tried and true reference to heavy handed moderating, used NUMEROUS times on this very board.

krom decided my actions were bad

i disagreed, and we 'argued'

mods began pouring on the 'PM is the rule', 'PM is how mods save face', 'PM is honorable'....

i disagreed, feeling that a public forum is the only way to hold people accountable for their actions.

people continue to target me, and i respond

others ask for an answer to the original question, why was that thread closed?

claims of 'judgement calls' are made...

more talking, more targeting of me

people say the closure was stupid, that the pm rule is stupid, and that there 'should be changes'...

others say the opposite, or have mixed feelings.

many people... REMAIN UNHEARD

lothar jumps in and people cheer for some reason

i'm still targeted...

and i still dislike the ideas being presented.

did i miss anything?

Lothar wrote:Notice that I didn't talk about those who merely "speak their minds" -- I spoke of those who "speak their minds and convince people". That's what I did -- I had an idea for how I thought the board should be run, and I talked to the guys running the place and eventually convinced them. I had an idea about how I thought the place should be run, and I convinced the powers that be that I had a good idea. It took time and a lot of discussion, but they came around because I actually did have a good idea.

good job, do you want a cookie?

what an amazingly self congratulating paragraph, does your 'I' key seem a little softer now.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:12 am

I have never even once felt any fear of backlash from speaking out against the popular beliefs, the staff, or anything else on the DBB that I felt needed it.

Take the donations adding postcount thing for instance. Some of the comments I got from that you could call \"backlash\". To the effect of: \"Wtf are you complaining about mr 8000 posts?\" \"What are you trying to prove?\" \"Selfish ungrateful arrogant.\". I brushed them off like the nothings they were. I knew what I was doing and why when I brought up that issue. Actually; when I posted that I was hoping Lothar would say what needed saying in his typical eloquent style and I was not disappointed. The only sarcastic comment I got from a staff member was from KB who was understandably stressed at the time, the rest were from normal users who I doubt would qualify for any \"inner circle\".

If that is the kind of backlash that is preventing this mass of people from speaking out; then I would call them all weakling cowards. If I were to fear something, I would fear being that timid.

Unless I am somehow protected by the mystical DBB inner circle?

WarAdvocat · Post by **WarAdvocat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:23 am

I think this is an appropriate time to add a \"heh\"

Seriously, though, this is getting ridiculous. Let it lie and move on. Point made. Counterpoint made. Counter-Counterpoint made. Counter-counter counterpoint made.

In all honesty, if I hadn't had previous negative experiences with PM'ing mods, I probably would have tried that. As it happened in the most recent instance, I didn't even get a response. Given the choice between waiting for another response, and guaranteeing one, I think you know what I chose.

'nuff said.

SuperSheep · Post by **SuperSheep** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:53 am

Who are the \"inner circle\"? I'd love to know.

I read both boards as well and I used to play D3 fairly regularly until my stick broke again *sigh*

I find it quite amusing that the thread here is being mirrored on the .com and being used to \"point out\" the flaws here. I have seen references to us as panhandlers. lol.

Flip closed a thread that he viewed as spam, ++postcount, wasted space, whatever you want to call it. AFAIK, no atempt was made to re-open the thread by its creator, and yet everyone jumps to his defense. Perhaps he was fine with it being closed? And even so, what about PM is bad? IMHO, that is the first step to any dispute with a moderator on any site.

Fyre's response on both this and the .com was inflammatory and uncalled for IMO. I think everyones entitled to their opininion and an ounce of respect.

And finally JBomb, keep in mind we all have our lines that we don't want crossed (flash). I don't see what .com doing as anything more than that, drawing a different set of lines in the sand.

I have found the moderation to be consistently fair and respectful here in all but a handful of occasions. And in those few occasions, such as this one, they are blown so completely out of proportion that the original transgression pales in significance.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:19 am

fyre, I haven't criticized you for your postcount.

i am not assuming anything in regards to how unreasonable people around here are.

Your own words:

PM is great if i wanna hear flip spout off about how right he is and how great he is. the ONLY way you folks can be held accountable is in a public forum, and that is why you are all so afraid of public threads in response to your actions.

That's a pretty clear indication that you're assuming flip and the rest of us are unreasonable. Flip is going to spout off and not listen, we're all afraid of public comments, we need to be held accountable, etc. Yes, you are assuming people are unreasonable.

a good chunk of this thread shows 'unreasonable'

I agree. You made a \"nazi\" comment, as well as several other comments of the sort I mentioned above, and some people chose to respond in an unreasonable way. But I'm not those people. Your beef with them is between you and them; I'm not a part of it. (There's that \"deal with each other privately\" concept again!) The only way in which I'm involved in the dispute is in making it clear to you why your comments are unconvincing:

You have not put forth a \"reasonable argument\". You've made some reasonable statements, and you've voiced some reasonable disagreement, but you haven't tied them together in a complete argument. Most of what you've done here is name-calling and insulting people. You continued it in your last post. And I have no doubt you'll come back and continue to treat yourself as the victim of moderator oppression because some people have responded to your insults with anger. You're trolling, fyre. You're trying to push people's buttons, and then acting upset when they target you.

many people... REMAIN UNHEARD

By \"many people\" I assume you mean most of the dotcom crowd. You act as if we haven't heard them before, as if the disagreements over how to moderate haven't been a part of this community for the past 8 years.

There's another set of \"many people\" who you haven't heard from, though. That's the people who send PM's to the moderators saying \"thanks for closing thread X\" or \"thanks for stopping that argument from getting out of hand\" all the time. Of the few hundred active members here, there are some who think the moderating is way too heavy-handed. And there are some who are sick of the unmoderated discussion they see elsewhere and want us to be heavier handed than we currently are. And we're somewhere in the middle, doing our best to make this place tolerable to as many people as possible. Some of us do a better job of it than others, and we all make mistakes from time to time, but I think a wholesale shift toward less moderation would be a bad move for the community. (That's one reason I'm so interested what's being done over on dotcom -- now that there's a whole board with that philosophy, we can see how it plays out and how that community develops.)

You asked \"did I miss anything?\" Well, you missed answering some direct questions I asked you:

1) why did you say flip would brush you off in PM's? Have you ever talked to him in private, or are you making an unwarranted assumption?

2) what \"backlash for speaking out\" are you talking about? I've seen backlash for name-calling and trolling but no backlash for disagreement.

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:20 pm

i didn't say you had said anything about my postcount, others have, and as i was saying... whether you all beleive me or not, i am not trying to boost my postcount... but i don't want to type a lot of words. as a matter of fact i wouldn't care if my damn postcount was reset, i don't really care. i just like to talk to people.

in regards to what i assume:

fliptw wrote:Spam is pointless, regardless of where. All mental masturbation is spam.

Dark wolf got his nicked changed, so he goes off and wants to know who else did it, and let everyone else know he got his nicked changed.

Because the description of the forum as "or all topics *not* covered in other DBB forums" doesn't mean the cafe is the waste bin of the board. Im aiming to keep the baseline of content above inanity, like the other cafe mods before me, and starting a post about a simple admin action is pure inanity.

the first thing MD said in that thread was "spam++".

If you had an issue with this War, you should've PM'd first, instead, the first thing I read on this is a PM from KB.

further, no i haven't spoken directly to him, however, having read his previous posts, i can ASSUME what his response will be. but having ALREADY READ his response, i am no longer assuming, as i have SEEN the response.

as to being unreasonable, i think the point i am TRYING To make is that everything i am saying is being taken out of context and then battered on. you keep referencing other people, then trying to bring this conversation back to just you and me, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

as to my 'arguement not being reasonable', you are entitled to that opinion i suppose.

by many people, i am only talking about here. i have only talked about here, and continue to talk about here. .com people are not a part of my motivations.

and i don't doubt in the least that there are many people who agree with many of the moderators actions, as a matter of fact, i have on most occosations been pleased with the moderator activity here.

the counter viewpoint i am referring to is that there are people here, who just aren't speaking out.

the backlash i am referring to is simply the 'negative' comments and opinions from the moderators as a whole, and the 'behind the back' discussions that go on. most people don't like to be berated and beat up on in a public forum, so they stay quiet.

krom says he doesn't mind it, some do. i assume most of the silence come from not trying to fight an old fight, or just not being willing to take the time to try when it is more or less like trying to convince a wall to be just a little shorter.

answers to your questions:

1) i said flip would brush me off in pm because he brushed off somone who has been here longer than i in a public forum. i made a fairly warranted assumption based on the responses i have seen here and in other threads.

2) backlash is backlash. dissenting opinion is often disregarded as name calling, and trolling, because it is negative to the 'popular' belief of those that wield the power. can i really believe that once this thread ends, everyone here will just forget about the 'feelings' they have against me?

beyond that, it was ONE of several reasons i presented that other people were not talking about this in this thread.

as to 'trolling' and 'pushing buttons', let me ask this, if i don't push buttons by posting opposing opinions, how will my opinions be known? button pushing to you seems to be offering ideas contrary to your own.

*JBOMB* · Post by ***JBOMB*** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:01 pm

Just wanted to throw everyone a curve ball by saying i think its awesome that this group even takes the time to get involved with eachother online...

There are few gaming communities that have such a large group that go so far back together..I know there are communities that are huge because gameX is currently huge..but those communities are usually too large and fade away too quickly to get to know one another...

So aside from bitching and moaning about the \"chain of commmand\" over here i wanted to let you peeps know that when i think about the d3 community i dont think \"grrr those mods\"...I think \"Man..the D3 community rules\" and ive always been really happy i fell into it...

So...is there any way to ban ferno?

KoolBear · Post by **KoolBear** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:52 pm

A great BOMB on the conversation JB thanks

*JBOMB* wrote:Just wanted to throw everyone a curve ball by saying i think its awesome that this group even takes the time to get involved with eachother online...

There are few gaming communities that have such a large group that go so far back together...

...

So...is there any way to ban ferno?

We all love ya JD (ferno)

This eloquent indeed. I think I am going to start a quotes thread some where and capture these comments. Maybe here in the feedback forum. Yes, and I'll leave the dagger in my backside

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:04 pm

The only person that PM'd me on this was koolbear. War never PM'd me.

WarAdvocat · Post by **WarAdvocat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 3:10 pm

Nope. Sure didn't. Sorry, nothing personal.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 3:58 pm

*JBOMB* wrote:So...is there any way to ban ferno?

for what?

To WA:
"In all honesty, if I hadn't had previous negative experiences with PM'ing mods, I probably would have tried that."

examples being?

"As it happened in the most recent instance, I didn't even get a response."

What timeframe are we talking? minutes? hours? days?

Panhandler statement:

A panhandler is someone who is on the street asking for spare change. What happened here is a donation system was implemented to help offset the costs for a good server that YOU GUYS WANTED that was owned by someone in the COMMUNITY. Did you guys figure the donations were going to an offshore company or something?

Definition of Donation:

n 1: a voluntary gift (as of money or service or ideas) made to some worthwhile cause [syn: contribution] 2: act of giving in common with others for a common purpose especially to a charity [syn: contribution]

To Flie:

"many people... REMAIN UNHEARD"

many people? are you indicating that there is a silent majority out there that are afraid to speak out because of this so-called 'moderator oppression'?

Or is it a few people in a MINORITY who THINK they speak for everyone?

I can speak from personal experience, and I invite those who I have PM discussions with to chime in on this, that every time I have been PM's about what I did, I was fair, civil, and reasonable. Also, o mod that I have known have been an 'ogre' or 'unreasonable' at all. There would have been something done about it if that were the case. I'm also still waiting for you to address the point that no one has complained about how Fliptw has moderated in the No Holds Barred forum. yet he adheres to the standards that have worked so well for him in cafe and that's wrong?

"by many people, i am only talking about here. i have only talked about here, and continue to talk about here. .com people are not a part of my motivations."

Actually, you are indeed talking about it over there. Does the sentence: "i'm screaming my guts out over there" ring a bell? that was quite underhanded of you to do. Please don't be dishonest in the future. it makes you look bad.

KoolBear · Post by **KoolBear** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:11 pm

Ferno wrote:
*JBOMB* wrote:So...is there any way to ban ferno?
for what?

I took it as a joke ferno

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:07 pm

I know. JT and I have this little running gag going on. sort of like an odd couple gag.

*JBOMB* · Post by ***JBOMB*** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 1:43 am

Walter Matthau wrote: You leave me notes on my pillow saying, "We need cereal FU", It took me six weeks to figure out that FU meant Felix Unger!"

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:12 am

ferno wrote:"by many people, i am only talking about here. i have only talked about here, and continue to talk about here. .com people are not a part of my motivations."

Actually, you are indeed talking about it over there. Does the sentence: "i'm screaming my guts out over there" ring a bell? that was quite underhanded of you to do. Please don't be dishonest in the future. it makes you look bad.

i did not say i am not TALKING ABOUT IT over there.. i was saying that i am not TALKING ABOUT THEM, or their opinions as my motivation.

it was in response to a suggestion that i was the mystic flag carrier for the .com, and that i was somehow trying to make 'their' opinions known, or speak for them. since lothar assumed everyone here already knows there opinions, and it is not necessary for me to 'speak for' the dark side of the dbb.

and of course the context of what i posted over there is lost as well... being that i was already talking here, without their blessing and prodding. the end of that statement was:

I wrote:ugh... so sad that the only people there that think they are doing the right things are the moderators...

of course it was made to a group of people who do tend to 'share' my 'opinions' on the moderation... although, in all honesty, i don't feel that i am 'backed-up' by them at all. i was making a statement, that was all.

again, stop picking apart my posts, if you read something, make sure you include the context... like the above quote being in reference to:

Lothar wrote:By "many people" I assume you mean most of the dotcom crowd. You act as if we haven't heard them before, as if the disagreements over how to moderate haven't been a part of this community for the past 8 years.

selective reading i suppose.

and why does it seem like the selected definiton of 'many people' here is: A VAST MAJORITY... it just means that there are more people than just me who feel frustrated or upset. does that seem so implausible... perhaps if i had said a few people, or some people, or maybe even... people.

i didn't say that EVERYONE is upset. or that the moderators were and oppresive force against the whole the dbb.net. i didn't say that the entire dbb is flwed and worthless. i never indicated that there was a clandestine operation being carried out to undermine the santictity of hedero sexual marriages. i certainly did not eat of bucket of the colonels crispy chicken recently, although i am thinking about doing so. i most definately am not claiming that this was the root of all evil, or opening a portal into another dimension where up is down, and down is up.

i said:

1. fliptw acted like a forum nazi

2. pm's seem like a horrible way to communicate open forum activity in what should be a 'semi-democratic' non-parlimentary pseudo-dictatorship... or something like that. anyway, that i whole heartedly disagree with the PM method, and that it seems fair to openly discuss the actions of a moderator, and that the comment of 'saving-face' is udderly ludicrous based on the idea that a moderator shouldn't have to save face, if they didn't do something that the community frowns on, there wouldn't be any need.

in other words: the ideas of PMing a moderator based on their actions upsets me more than the actual actions of the mod. there should be a level of public accountability, and maybe, once in a while, the need for a moderator to even 'apologize' openly for something they did. that would be a great face-saving action. not hiding it under the cover of pm's in the hopes that fewer people will notice... but i digress, since in this thread, in the present company i am in a huge minority.

3. that i am aware of other people HERE being frustrated by the recent actions of the moderator in question.

4. that when people speak out against these things, mods jump up and down and scream.

i also invite lothar, who seems to 'understand' my argument and points, but still says i have failed to demonstrate them reasonably, to put together the CORRECT way for me to have stated things. perhaps he could even PM it to me, so i can post it here and 'save-face'.

i want to know what exactly i SHOULD have said here to make everyone happy. since no one here ever posts their frustrations, or thoughts, in an ineloquent manner. i want to know why i'm different.

oh and as to the 'lack of complaints' about flips moderation in the nhb, i haven't really paid any attention to the level of moderation there for the most part. it tends to be a bunch of funny posts, roughly 90% worthy of the cafe anyway...

obviously i don't really know about any complaints he may have recieved about his level of moderation there, but i will blindly accept your indication of Zero at face value and say: "So?". i am not talking about his actions there, i am talking about the most open and inane of all forums: the PTMC Cafe, where almost every thread is as worthless as the last. Where threads are being moved and shaken EVERY which way since he began his moderator-ship of that forum. I can think of 2 threads where i disagree with his actions, and a few points where he should have been clearer about his actions (if they were his actions at all....) but those things are not what i am talking about now...

again, thank you for your time.

(p.s. lol @ ferno for the rant about panhandling... wth mang? supersheep is like, in your court and stuff... oh... and i don't really care if my donation went to an offshore account, as long as this thing moves quick so i can post post post post post.)

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 2:09 pm

If you would like to see what good modding is, regoster and log on to redvsblue.com and hang out on thier forums for while. they can be brutal but the moderators do a superb job of maintaining order. They are tough and carry a sharp stick. ..er.. big stick... whatever. At the same time they are not without understanding. I got nailed for having an \"inappropriate\" pic on my page and it was removed and I got a warning. The pic wasn't that bad, infact I was startled that it even got attention, but reading through the rules, it did violate one.

KoolBear · Post by **KoolBear** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 2:19 pm

fyrephlie wrote:
...oh... and i don't really care if my donation went to an offshore account...

fyrephlie,

I've been upfront and always honest with you, but WTF does this mean?

I take offense to the implication. Comments like this start rumors!

I demand clarification from you and also you removing that comment from your post!

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 2:50 pm

Ok, so let me get this straight. You're scared of sending fliptw a private message just because he posted his justification? How can you know how he'll react IF YOU DON'T TRY? Instead of actually TRYING to communicate with him, you act like the jesus christ of the \"people\". Seriously, what kind of reaction did you think this would provoke? If you act like an attention whore of COURSE you're going to catch flak for it. You personally attack a mod with a cheap shot (TWICE), and you don't expect his friends not to stick up for him? HELLO? Anyone home?

1. fliptw acted like a forum nazi

To you maybe. Closing one thread hardly qualifies as being a forum nazi. I re-direct you to my post at the bottom of page one.

2. pm's seem like a horrible way to communicate open forum activity in what should be a 'semi-democratic' non-parlimentary pseudo-dictatorship... or something like that.

And how do you justify that, when you refused to talk about fliptw's actions to him privately? You're too much of a chickenshit to step up to the plate and discuss it with him privately, because you're afraid of the \"backlash\".....so you start a flamewar in this thread. BRILLIANT move.

anyway, that i whole heartedly disagree with the PM method, and that it seems fair to openly discuss the actions of a moderator, and that the comment of 'saving-face' is udderly ludicrous based on the idea that a moderator shouldn't have to save face, if they didn't do something that the community frowns on, there wouldn't be any need.

It doesn't matter if you disagree with it or not. Thats what you should have done. If fliptw went on a thread closing spree for shits 'n giggles, then yes a thread like this would be justified. So far fliptw has done NOTHING to justify all the bitching you've done.

3. that i am aware of other people HERE being frustrated by the recent actions of the moderator in question.

Really? Where are they? Why aren't they participating in this thread? Where is your evidence to support your claim?

4. that when people speak out against these things, mods jump up and down and scream.

Evidence? How can you justify that claim when you've only been here what....two months? You weren't even AROUND for any of the previous altercations. The only jumping and screaming I see here is coming straight from YOU.

oh and as to the 'lack of complaints' about flips moderation in the nhb, i haven't really paid any attention to the level of moderation there for the most part. it tends to be a bunch of funny posts, roughly 90% worthy of the cafe anyway...

Now you're contradicting yourself. You said that everytime mods and members have crossed paths, we jump up and down and scream.....yet you admit here that you never really pay attention. How can you justify an arguement over something you apparently could care less about?

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:27 pm

/me hands Flie the golden shovel award.

Let's break this down.

\"by many people, i am only talking about here. i have only talked about here, and continue to talk about here. .com people are not a part of my motivations.\"

By phrasing this sentence this way, and using the same word sequence, this is exploiting a common trick in how the brain processes information. When a person's mind sees 'talking about here' more that once, they fill in the word 'it' before the word 'here'.

This trick is bolstered by this sentence: \"of course it was made to a group of people who do tend to 'share' my 'opinions' on the moderation...\"

meaning you are letting their opinions influence your own, which negates your argument of: ' i was saying that i am not TALKING ABOUT THEM, or their opinions as my motivation.'

\"again, stop picking apart my posts, if you read something, make sure you include the context...\"

I pick apart posts that I believe to be illogical, dishonest, full of rhetoric, or a mix thereof.

\"and why does it seem like the selected definiton of 'many people' here is: A VAST MAJORITY... it just means that there are more people than just me who feel frustrated or upset. does that seem so implausible... perhaps if i had said a few people, or some people, or maybe even... people.\"

I have addressed this previously. The term 'many people' imply there's a large group out there. Exactly how many is 'many people'?

\"i didn't say that EVERYONE is upset. or that the moderators were and oppresive force against the whole the dbb.net. i didn't say that the entire dbb is flwed and worthless. i never indicated that there was a clandestine operation being carried out to undermine the santictity of hedero sexual marriages. i certainly did not eat of bucket of the colonels crispy chicken recently, although i am thinking about doing so. i most definately am not claiming that this was the root of all evil, or opening a portal into another dimension where up is down, and down is up.\"

Rhetoric; with a generous helping of hyperbole.

\"(p.s. lol @ ferno for the rant about panhandling... wth mang? supersheep is like, in your court and stuff... oh... and i don't really care if my donation went to an offshore account, as long as this thing moves quick so i can post post post post post.)\"

I never brought supersheep into this, why are you doing it? Also, your comment about 'an offshore account' is intellectually dishonest and quite rude.

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:30 am

Ferno wrote:Panhandler statement:

A panhandler is someone who is on the street asking for spare change. What happened here is a donation system was implemented to help offset the costs for a good server that YOU GUYS WANTED that was owned by someone in the COMMUNITY. Did you guys figure the donations were going to an offshore company or something?

if you missed it:

Ferno Wrote: Did you guys figure the donations were going to an offshore company or something?

jesus, you don't even remember what you wrote?

as to supersheep:

ferno, hit ctrl-f

type: panhandler

tell where the word first showed up in this thread, then tell me where your response was. i'd be willing to bet you saw the word 'panhandler' while skimming up and down and in your already seething state, threw in a response to that as well...

as to my word tricks or whatever, sure, ok ferno, i clearly 'tricked' you into reading IT wrong. has nothing to do with your ability to control your anger and actually READ a post.

KB, read the entire thread please.

seriously, i don't know how you can expect solid moderation if none of you can read the thread from start to finish.

MD,

nope, your statements aren't even worth a response.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:31 am

fyrephlie wrote:in regards to what i assume:

..... having read his previous posts, i can ASSUME what his response will be. but having ALREADY READ his response, i am no longer assuming, as i have SEEN the response.

No, you haven't already SEEN his response to a civil PM requesting the thread be reopened. What you've SEEN is his response to a public, accusatory "challenge" thread that asked him for a definition.

In my experience, most moderators will re-open threads if they get a few PM's saying "I thought that was an interesting thread" and they didn't have extremely good reason to close it. Flip thought it was inane, but if more than one person told him they thought it was worthwhile, he may have changed his mind. But as far as I can tell, not a *single person* thought "gee, maybe flip is reasonable and will re-open the thread if I tell him I thought it was interesting."

the ideas of PMing a moderator based on their actions upsets me more than the actual actions of the mod. there should be a level of public accountability, and maybe, once in a while, the need for a moderator to even 'apologize' openly for something they did.

Here, I think you take an insulting view of moderators. You're treating us as though we're big jerks who couldn't *possibly* change our minds about closing threads and who couldn't *possibly* make a public apology if we did something wrong unless enough public pressure was applied (I guess you don't know about the many times mods have changed their minds or the numerous apologies mods have posted when they've erred in judgement.) You think the only way we as moderators will act like adults is if you focus enough attention on us. You've reiterated this view throughout this thread -- that we use PM's and move threads to feedback to "hide" or "save face" or whatever. This isn't a conclusion you came to because of this thread; you *started* with a hostile view of us.

You didn't start by saying "hey flip, I think it would be reasonable to re-open the thread because it was interesting" (either in a PM or in public) or even "I think mods shouldn't close so many threads, you should let us post even if it's pointless", but by calling flip a nazi. Your second post contined an imagined mod/user conversation where you depicted the mod as a total jerk. And in the rest of your posts, you've continued to make insulting and overdramatic comments about moderators, and you seek to justify this by saying you've been "targeted", as if you'd been acting perfectly civil and then someone took your ideas out of context and blasted you. You haven't shown any interest in having a discussion or having a civil interaction with us; you've stated time and time again that your purpose here is to "hold us accountable" -- to draw attention, to make a scene, to yell and scream and try to get people *outraged* over a thread being closed so that we'll be embarrassed enough to behave like you want us to. You weren't here to try to converse with us, you were here to yell at us about how we're a bunch of stupid nazis so we'll be humiliated enough to change our ways.

the backlash i am referring to is simply the 'negative' comments and opinions from the moderators as a whole, and the 'behind the back' discussions that go on.....

dissenting opinion is often disregarded as name calling, and trolling, because it is negative to the 'popular' belief of those that wield the power.

You'll notice very little "backlash" or "repercussions" toward JBomb and WarAdvocat, who've posted plenty of dissenting opinion. Who's getting backlash? The guy who's been overdramatic and insulting in every single post.

if i don't push buttons by posting opposing opinions, how will my opinions be known? button pushing to you seems to be offering ideas contrary to your own.

You'll notice I haven't accused JBomb of trolling or pushing buttons. I did say WA was making a slightly veiled accusation in his first post, but haven't said he's trolling. Both have offered ideas contrary to my own, and many others do that here on a regular basis, but I don't accuse them of trolling or pushing buttons.

Who am I accusing of trolling and pushing buttons? The guy who's been insulting and overdramatic in every single post.

it was in response to a suggestion that i was the mystic flag carrier for the .com, and that i was somehow trying to make 'their' opinions known, or speak for them. since lothar assumed everyone here already knows there opinions, and it is not necessary for me to 'speak for' the dark side of the dbb.

You misunderstood my assumption, then. I was assuming you'd actually heard from people who you say "remain unheard", and my best guess was that you'd heard from them in the public forums on dotcom since I have no reason to believe you've been getting PM's from others here. I certainly don't think you're their representative, only that they were the people you have in mind. Based on your last post, it sounds like you're now "aware of other people HERE" who still "remain unheard", so my assumption was incorrect. (Though I do have to wonder, have you actually heard from others here who would not rightly be described as the "dotcom crowd", or are you just hypothesizing that such people exist?)

(continued in next post...)

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:32 am

(continued...)

i also invite lothar, who seems to 'understand' my argument and points, but still says i have failed to demonstrate them reasonably, to put together the CORRECT way for me to have stated things....

i want to know what exactly i SHOULD have said here to make everyone happy.

I didn't say I understood all of your points, and I think I said pretty explicitly that I don't see any coherent argument in your posts. I do, however, understand a few of the individual points you've made, and some of them were good points we should probably discuss once we've got all the yelling out of the way.

Let me suggest how you could have said things differently:

FIRST POST: \"I really think flip should have left the thread open. It was an interesting thread, and he seemed to be a bit heavyhanded in closing it. I think we should be allowed to post pointless things.\" (Note the lack of a hitler face, and the presence of your idea for moderator actions.)

SECOND POST: \"No, I haven't tried sending a PM. I think it makes sense to discuss public actions in public, allowing the public to contribute.\" (Note the lack of a nazi comparison, the lack of an assumption that mods are unreasonable. The last line of your second post was good.)

SUBSEQUENT POSTS: refrain from the following:
- comparisons to Nazis, China, etc.
- suggesting that moving feedback threads to the feedback forum or requesting people send PM's is \"hiding\" things because we're \"afraid\" and need to \"save face\"
- littel insults and cheap shots like \"gung-ho\", \"inner circle-jerk\", \"amazingly self congratulating\", and so on
- assuming moderators will brush off suggestions or disagreement unless we're publicly \"held accountable\"
- suggesting people remain silent out of fear of backlash, even though others got little to no backlash
- taking a generally hostile attitude toward many of us, and generally being (hey look I'm going to say it again) insulting and overdramatic

Had you taken this approach, you might have been convincing. Even if not, you would have at least had to endure significantly less \"backlash\".

So, how about it... can we discuss the points you want discussed without the drama and insults?

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:48 am

Guys -- don't feed the trolls.

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:11 am

Wow i just read through this and all i have to say (except for fry) this is almost all admins from 2 boards bickering. Nice flamejob

So to my understanding, why lock pointless threads here go over there

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 8:07 am

A cautionary tail.

In ANOTHER thread on this board, I did something really stupid. Ok, Ok, I know, everyone is thinking, \"And that would be every thread you've posted in, right?\", but no, this was beyond my normal idiocy.

Fusion Pimp posted a long economic article. The article mentioned \"his new book\". FP didn't place a link, or credit any author, so I, being the dope that I am, assumed he had written it himself.

Now, to defend myself slightly, In a cryptography forum I participate in, I discovered that TWO, yes, not one but TWO of the people I was corresponding with on a regular basis were actually published authors. I mean \"You can find them in Amazon\" main stream published authors. So I didn't find the idea shocking that one of our members might be a famous lawyer who had written a book and liked to play Descent after he got home from court.

SO, I did a bit of wandering on the web and found the book, and a lot more references to the author. To say the least, I was shocked. The guy gave every appearance of being a White Supremist Racist. It made me sad, and mad.

I WANTED to give FP a chance to defend himself. So I deliberately composed my response to allow him to correct this wrong view I had obtained by reading the web. I pointed out that obviously the people who wrote those reviews were hostile and perhaps they had exaggerated or lied? So far so good, I was giving him the best benefit of the doubt I thought I could manage.

But that's when I got stupid. Instead of sending Fusion Pimp a PM, I thought, \"Heck, he posted about his book in a public forum, I should reply in the same forum\". So, in my righteous wrath, I posted. A few hours later, I got the response back. It was remarkably calm considering what I had done. You see, as everyone ELSE on God's green earth realized, it wasn't Fusion Pimp's article. FP was NOT the lawyer who had written it. And the reason FP hadn't posted a link or any references to the original author was specifically because he did NOT approve of the racist attitude. He wanted to post the economic comments without subjecting anyone to the rest of the garbage.

And... He asked why I hadn't just PM'd him about it.

I had to retreat, delete my post, and apologize (which FP very graciously accepted). All because I hadn't had the decency to confront him PRIVATELY before I confronted him PUBLICLY. And it's NOT like a PM would have in any way reduced my chance to point out this nastiness. If Fusion Pimp's answer to the PM had not been to my satisfaction, I could have posted the message on the forum in a heartbeat. The only thing I LOST by not going with the PM was a chance to let him answer the questions before he was publicly attacked. And the chance for me to back down in private embarrassment instead of public humiliation.

Now, this story obviously isn't about forum moderation, but I still think the same lesson applies. You can't LOSE anything by PMing the mod first. Please note, I am NOT defending the closing of the thread. It certainly wasn't the most intellectually stimulating discussion going on, but I recognize that many threads that are interesting to others won't be interesting to me. But whether or not the thread should have been closed isn't actually the point right now, it's how do we, as civilized people and a community of FRIENDS, deal with issues like this. And I think the best response is the biblical one.

Mt 18:15-17 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

PM the mod, if the answer doesn't satisfy you, have a few friends PM him as well. And only when that fails, take it to the forums. You lose nothing except for the chance to settle the issue amicably. I wish *I* had done it that way.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 3:06 pm

fyrephlie wrote:MD, nope, your statements aren't even worth a response.

So in other words you conceed. Fine by me.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:46 pm

flie, i was responding to your 'i don't care if...' statement.

I know what I wrote. It also came from the fact that a few users made a big deal out of the donation thing. I don't need it to be blown up to 40 pt or whatever size you made it.

I also was never angry when I wrote my reply. Even now, i am not angry. The best way you can describe my state is a little bewildered. Also, I pointed out that the way you wrote that statement was ambiguous. I don't need to be angry in posts. It doesn't work, for obvious reasons.

If you wish to accuse me of something, make sure it is a valid accusation. As it stands, the accusations you have leveled against me are simply false.

I've seen you get angry in your posts, which was given away by the fact you decided to post in capital letters. If your tactic is to make me angry, I hate to disappoint you; it is not working.

If you want to make a solid argument, make sure it's clearly written. Instead you throw together a poorly written statement and then blame others for not understanding.

Would you take the same stance with an english teacher? Write an essay or piece, get a bad mark and then throw a fit, blaming the teacher?

also your remark about 'behind the back' discussions; the Feedback forum is viewable to ALL DBB patrons. So how can it be 'behind the back' when everyone can see it? It's not like you have to be in a special usergroup or something, ala NHB.

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:41 am

md: i really just don't think your responses were worth it, most of them were just silly, and completely out of context, or glaringly ignorant. you didn't say anything for me to concede too. but if you want to, you can tell all your friends you 'totally pwned me' or whatever. i won't mind.

ferno: you and kb both didn't get what i was saying. my point in saying that i don't care if my donation went to an offshore account is that i don't care. i donated to what i think is a great forum, in the hopes of it going faster. it's going faster. so i don't care if that if my money went to fund your meth habit or bought bunt cake at a church rally. i just want a solid server to post on.

behind the back discussions. ferno... do you ever talk to md outside the dbb?

sorry if you have so much trouble understanding me ferno, i appreciate the continued attempts to blame your lack of cognitive ability on my writing habits. before you respond to something, read it, think about it, then type something.

actually, i never got any bad marks in english, believe it or not. as i have said before, until someone here starts paying me, i am not going to try all that hard.

as to your being angry, i don't want your anger, i want your attention, but all i am getting is negative attention. i don't know why i would expect anything less.

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 1:31 am

lothar: as always, you have a point (or several of them). i'm just frustrated.

i think a lot of what i have written has been misunderstood, for obvious reasons. there is a lot of frustration behind the posts. i think that there is alot a lot of unneeded puffing too. im a fairly laid back guy, there is a reason i type in all lowercase (besides the laziness factor). i really don't think all of this is that big of a deal beleive it or not.

the nazi comment was meant to be more humerous than it was taken, i actually think krom got that too (he has even posted 'nazi based' images when closing threads he moderates, and i think it's funny. but his responses were serious in nature, and i agreed with him to a degree, which is why i removed the second comment i made in the initial thread, and admitted i was wrong for putting it there. 'forum-nazi' is something i consider to be a humerous way of saying that the moderator is overly heavy handed.

seeing flips public response: why should anyone here speak differently in public than in private.

as to coming into the thread with a 'hostile' view, i certainly did. and i continue to have a hostile view. i don't see the reasonable nature in the moderators you are presenting.

saving face: the term was presented by kb near the outset of the thread, and it really is what we are talking about when talking about going private. i don't understand why there is such a hub-bub over a public response to moderator action.

if i can quote one of the dotcom crowd:

Pun wrote:The moderators are here to do a job. That job is to promote the flow of the topics at hand, NOT to judge the content. Personal attacks, inapropriate content like porn or warez, racism, gross derailment of a serious thread, fine. Moderate it. But don't second guess the members by choosing what they can or can't discuss. I mean damn, who cares if someone wants to discuss the health benefits of eating cat litter? If it's not your bag, dont continue to read the thread. These boards are for trading information, opinions and beliefs, but they're also for entertainment. Why stop people from having fun?

that more eloquently sums up my thoughts on moderation.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 2:06 am

fyrephlie wrote:ferno: you and kb both didn't get what i was saying. my point in saying that i don't care if my donation went to an offshore account is that i don't care. i donated to what i think is a great forum, in the hopes of it going faster. it's going faster. so i don't care if that if my money went to fund your meth habit or bought bunt cake at a church rally. i just want a solid server to post on.

Why did you bring 'meth habit' into this?

behind the back discussions. ferno... do you ever talk to md outside the dbb?

do you speak to other people outside the dbb? If so, it effectively negates this argument.

sorry if you have so much trouble understanding me ferno, i appreciate the continued attempts to blame your lack of cognitive ability on my writing habits. before you respond to something, read it, think about it, then type something.

another personal attack.

actually, i never got any bad marks in english, believe it or not. as i have said before, until someone here starts paying me, i am not going to try all that hard.

Dodging the question.

as to your being angry, i don't want your anger, i want your attention, but all i am getting is negative attention. i don't know why i would expect anything less.

Are you having trouble understanding what I wrote? I said it before, and I'll say it again. I'm not angry. I don't need to get angry. It doesn't help anything.

Please post the forum rules. To start with..

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: